What is the reasoning for the current point system?

[JimClarkFan]

I did some calculations based on an alternative point system.

The maximum number of points = sum of the number of drivers on the grid

Example:
2013 = max points per race is 22
2012 = max points per race is 24
2011 = max points per race is 24
2010 = max points per race is 24

1st place = max points available
All other places = Max points - (finishing position + 1)
DNF no points

I only did this for the past 4 seasons with the top 3 drivers, and the projected position is relative only to the others analysed (sorry I could not be bothered doing the entire grid of drivers each season)



I don't like that there are only points for the top 10, but I can't really verbalise why.

Do we think this is a fairer reflection of the actual season?

[LionKing]

I think no, just one point difference between 1st and 2nd, 2nd and 3rd would have been ridiculously low.

Secondly, drivers might as well not try to pass the guy in P1 for 1 point while risking 24.

Edit: As for your table, did you check the final classifications for each driver? There seems to be awfully lot of zeros. They may not have finished the race but that does not mean they were classified the last...Ok i see now you have said zero points for DNF.

[JimClarkFan]

I think no, just one point difference between 1st and 2nd, 2nd and 3rd would have been ridiculously low.

Secondly, drivers might as well not try to pass the guy in P1 for 1 point while risking 24.

Edit: As for your table, did you check the final classifications for each driver? There seems to be awfully lot of zeros. They may not have finished the race but that does not mean they were classified the last...Ok i see now you have said zero points for DNF.

Yes but you were also correct, there was a couple of races which awarded half points they had a character which couldn't be processed correctly and displayed 0. I have fixed that and updated the table.

Regarding the point scoring system, why is 1 point system ridiculously low? A consistent point scoring system of -1 every position further down the field you finish makes more sense that an illogical -7, -3, -3, -2, -2, -2, -2, -2, -1. Moreover, a consistent points grap better represents your average race finish over year.

[ChrisF1]

If you had a chance of 18 points, would you risk overtaking Pastor Maldonado just to get 19?

Alternatively, if you were on for 6 then you may risk it for the chance of 8.

2 points is big when only 10 people score points. 1 point difference is nothing when 24 can score.

[JimClarkFan]

If you had a chance of 18 points, would you risk overtaking Pastor Maldonado just to get 19?

Alternatively, if you were on for 6 then you may risk it for the chance of 8.

2 points is big when only 10 people score points. 1 point difference is nothing when 24 can score.

Do you think those people would keep their jobs if they weren't giving 100%?

[SectorOne]

The introduction of the new point system was to give an incentive to pass the guy in front because there´s now more to gain by doing so.
Mainly for the front runners which is why there´s a whopping 7 point difference between first and second.

[LionKing]

The current point system is a bit between 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 and 10-6-4-3-2-1 systems and more positions are awarded points.

In the 10-8- system, it would be like getting 20 points for 2nd while in 10-6- it would be like 15 points compared to 25 points for winner.

[mertol]

1 point difference for each position is not fair. It's a lot harder overtaking the leader than overtaking a backmarker and points should reflect that. The best scoring system was 10-6-4-3-2-1 IMO.

[Powershift]

there is absolutely no reasoning behind it, which is quite a shame for the most technologically advanced racing series the points system is ass backwards.

Winning should be the #1 priority and goal and the points system should reflect that, the driver with the most wins should be champion NO MATTER WHAT.

It makes no sense that a Win is only worth 39% more points than a 2nd. Also a 3rd and a 4th(27 points) is better than a Win and a DNF(25 points), if you asked the drivers whether they would rather a win & DNF or a 3rd & 4th(points notwithstanding) I am sure 100% of them would rather the win.

Wins are way too devalued and DNF's are much too punishing.

The old system, such as in '88, where a driver's 11 best scores out of the 16 races, provides much more impetus for the leading drivers and teams to go for wins, while not giving DNF's more weight than Wins.

The driver with the most wins should always be the champion no matter what.

[mnmracer]

Looking at 2010 and 2012, it seems to punish DNFs even more. I don't think we should want that.

[SectorOne]

Also a 3rd and a 4th(27 points) is better than a Win and a DNF(25 points), if you asked the drivers whether they would rather a win & DNF or a 3rd & 4th(points notwithstanding) I am sure 100% of them would rather the win.

I doubt it. They will want to go with the option that gives the most points because that´s what gets you world titles, not how many wins you racked up during a season.

[Powershift]

Also a 3rd and a 4th(27 points) is better than a Win and a DNF(25 points), if you asked the drivers whether they would rather a win & DNF or a 3rd & 4th(points notwithstanding) I am sure 100% of them would rather the win.

I doubt it. They will want to go with the option that gives the most points because that´s what gets you world titles, not how many wins you racked up during a season.

End of season, WDC positions already locked in(a proper points not withstanding scenario) You could not find me 1 driver in the paddock that would take a 3rd & 4th over a WIN & DNF. That is what the driver points system should truly be designed towards.

[SectorOne]

End of season, WDC positions already locked in(a proper points not withstanding scenario) You could not find me 1 driver in the paddock that would take a 3rd & 4th over a WIN & DNF.

..because the championship is over. If the championship is over then you might as well take wins since the loss in points has no effect on the championship.

[Powershift]

End of season, WDC positions already locked in(a proper points not withstanding scenario) You could not find me 1 driver in the paddock that would take a 3rd & 4th over a WIN & DNF.

..because the championship is over. If the championship is over then you might as well take wins since the loss in points has no effect on the championship.

So therefore without the influence of points, since wins are most coveted by both the drivers and teams then the points system should reflect that throughout the year instead of rewarding mediocrity, simple and plain.

a 3rd and a 4th should never be worth more points a than a win, even when coupled with a DNF, I'm not even sure 2 2nd places should be rewarded as much as a win. The driver with the most wins should be the WDC under all circumstances.

[SectorOne]

a 3rd and a 4th should never be worth more points a than a win, even when coupled with a DNF, I'm not even sure 2 2nd places should be rewarded as much as a win. The driver with the most wins should be the WDC under all circumstances.

So if 19 drivers all win one race each then crashes out in all other races due to their own fault, they should be in contention for the championship rather then driver number 20 who came second in every single grand prix that year?
Arguably he´s done the best job but now he´s not even in the Top 19 of the championship.

Just an extreme example to illustrate my point.

Also important to point out,

2013, Vettel WDC and most wins
2012, Vettel WDC and most wins
2011, Vettel WDC and most wins
2010, Vettel and Alonso equal on wins, 4 point difference in the end.

For the most part it already is like you want but with the fact that point counts first, then you look at wins.